why was the usa the only one to go to the moon?

[Abaddon]

anybody figure out how to do a lunar rendezvous without an IMU alignment yet?  I'm looking into that.  I know that's a touchy subject.

Since you're back on the subject, how about telling us exactly what degree of precision is needed in determining the LM's position in order to afect a successful liftoff and rendezvous. Have you managed to grasp that those two things were not one and the same process yet?

How about 3 decimal places in feet, since the CM is only 60 miles up?  If you're off by a hair, it turns into miles down range.  I've personally witnessed that when somebody gave me an equation with a wrong sign (+/-) that caused an error in the least significant bit of a calculation related to IMU alignment, which gets integrated (added repeatedly), and they almost aborted a launch in flight (that's when they blow it up.) I've got to talk to some people about this alignment issue. 

In the meantime, what year are we supposed to have another manned lunar mission?

Albeit this is all kinds of wrong.
1. I have given you my real name.
2. I have provided you a patent in my name.
3. I have scanned my accreditation as an engineer and handed it to you.

You have done nothing. Because you are scared.

Real engineers don't do that.

[Jason Thompson]

How about 3 decimal places in feet, since the CM is only 60 miles up?

Why are those two things linked?

If you're off by a hair, it turns into miles down range.

Do you believe a downrange error in orbital position is impossible to correct with the spacecraft RCS system? Do you even know what the RCS system is?

Again, do you understand that getting into orbit and meeting the CSM are two separate processes?

[alexsanchez]

anybody figure out how to do a lunar rendezvous without an IMU alignment yet?  I'm looking into that.  I know that's a touchy subject.

Since you're back on the subject, how about telling us exactly what degree of precision is needed in determining the LM's position in order to afect a successful liftoff and rendezvous. Have you managed to grasp that those two things were not one and the same process yet?

How about 3 decimal places in feet, since the CM is only 60 miles up?  If you're off by a hair, it turns into miles down range.  I've personally witnessed that when somebody gave me an equation with a wrong sign (+/-) that caused an error in the least significant bit of a calculation related to IMU alignment, which gets integrated (added repeatedly), and they almost aborted a launch in flight (that's when they blow it up.) I've got to talk to some people about this alignment issue. 

In the meantime, what year are we supposed to have another manned lunar mission?

Would you characterize a downrange error as being the most problematic for successful rendezvous?

yes

[Glom]

anybody figure out how to do a lunar rendezvous without an IMU alignment yet?  I'm looking into that.  I know that's a touchy subject.

Since you're back on the subject, how about telling us exactly what degree of precision is needed in determining the LM's position in order to afect a successful liftoff and rendezvous. Have you managed to grasp that those two things were not one and the same process yet?

How about 3 decimal places in feet, since the CM is only 60 miles up?  If you're off by a hair, it turns into miles down range.  I've personally witnessed that when somebody gave me an equation with a wrong sign (+/-) that caused an error in the least significant bit of a calculation related to IMU alignment, which gets integrated (added repeatedly), and they almost aborted a launch in flight (that's when they blow it up.) I've got to talk to some people about this alignment issue. 

In the meantime, what year are we supposed to have another manned lunar mission?

Would you characterize a downrange error as being the most problematic for successful rendezvous?

yes

Was this at all correctable during the course of the rendezvous process?

[Jason Thompson]

Would you characterize a downrange error as being the most problematic for successful rendezvous?

yes

Why? And do you believe it was impossible to correct?

[Zakalwe]

'

[Glom]

We're trying to tease out of him whether he recognises the RCS.

[alexsanchez]

anybody figure out how to do a lunar rendezvous without an IMU alignment yet?  I'm looking into that.  I know that's a touchy subject.

Since you're back on the subject, how about telling us exactly what degree of precision is needed in determining the LM's position in order to afect a successful liftoff and rendezvous. Have you managed to grasp that those two things were not one and the same process yet?

How about 3 decimal places in feet, since the CM is only 60 miles up?  If you're off by a hair, it turns into miles down range.  I've personally witnessed that when somebody gave me an equation with a wrong sign (+/-) that caused an error in the least significant bit of a calculation related to IMU alignment, which gets integrated (added repeatedly), and they almost aborted a launch in flight (that's when they blow it up.) I've got to talk to some people about this alignment issue. 

In the meantime, what year are we supposed to have another manned lunar mission?

Would you characterize a downrange error as being the most problematic for successful rendezvous?

yes

Was this at all correctable during the course of the rendezvous process?

I'd actually say about 1 foot accuracy in xyz, but small fraction of a degree in azimuth and elevation.  Do you have thrust vectoring on the LM?  I don't think RCS is ever used with the main engine.

[nomuse]

anybody figure out how to do a lunar rendezvous without an IMU alignment yet?  I'm looking into that.  I know that's a touchy subject.

Since you're back on the subject, how about telling us exactly what degree of precision is needed in determining the LM's position in order to afect a successful liftoff and rendezvous. Have you managed to grasp that those two things were not one and the same process yet?

How about 3 decimal places in feet, since the CM is only 60 miles up?  If you're off by a hair, it turns into miles down range.  I've personally witnessed that when somebody gave me an equation with a wrong sign (+/-) that caused an error in the least significant bit of a calculation related to IMU alignment, which gets integrated (added repeatedly), and they almost aborted a launch in flight (that's when they blow it up.) I've got to talk to some people about this alignment issue. 

In the meantime, what year are we supposed to have another manned lunar mission?

Would you characterize a downrange error as being the most problematic for successful rendezvous?

yes

Was this at all correctable during the course of the rendezvous process?

I'd actually say about 1 foot accuracy in xyz, but small fraction of a degree in azimuth and elevation.  Do you have thrust vectoring on the LM?  I don't think RCS is ever used with the main engine.

Interesting.  You are unsure if they can vector the APS, and you think the RCS can't be used concurrently.  This strongly implies that all of the acceleration during the ascent is along a single vector.  Do you believe this is an accurate way to describe a launch to orbit of any spacecraft?

[Noldi400]

Zakalwe:

I think that's what I am getting at. Is Alexsanchez saying that the LM is nothing more than a glorified skyrocket (albeit, one that can keep itself pointing in the direction that it was launched at)...basically, pick a target in the sky and it fires at that position? 
Even a dumb-ass like me recognises that the embedded computer system, along with the control system, inertial platform, inputs from rendezvous radar and so on, could react in real-time to new data and alter its trajectory.

One non engineer to another:

Alexsanchez is saying that [1] It was impossible for the crew of the LM to determine their precise position on the surface without at least one reference point on the ground, and [2] Without knowing their precise location, it would be impossible to accurately launch into a rendezvous orbit.

Everyone is trying to convince him that [1] It was NOT necessary to know their precise surface location, because getting to an acceptable orbit is a matter of 'aiming' for a particular position in space, and they could determine their position in 3D space by determining the local vertical and taking a bearing on two known stars, both of which they were equipped to do, so [2] is incorrect, because their orbit could be corrected - within reason - to make rendezvous.

They did a lot of this sort of thing during the Gemini Program. On Gemini 10, John Young and Mike Collins did a rendezvous and docking with an Agena vehicle that had been launched a few minutes before them, then undocked and did a rendezvous with the Agena that was used as a target for Gemini 8, 5 months before.

[smartcooky]

Do you believe a downrange error in orbital position is impossible to correct with the spacecraft RCS system? Do you even know what the RCS system is?

I doubt that he knows what it is or understands how it works

Again, do you understand that getting into orbit and meeting the CSM are two separate processes?

I am beginning to wonder about this myself. Surely he must understand that getting into orbit and orbital rendezvous with another spacecraft are two separate issues. While it is very efficient and saves a lot of time and fuel to arrive in orbit just as the spacecraft you are to rendezvous arrives, it doesn't have to be this way.

[Glom]

Do you have thrust vectoring on the LM?

You don't know? Don't you think you should have familiarised yourself with such things because making audacious assertions?

The answer is no. The LM APS was fixed and attitude control was provided by the LM RCS.

And that course means...

I don't think RCS is ever used with the main engine.

... you're wrong!

Interesting you call it the main engine. How many engines were there on the LM?

[Mag40]

The Hasselblad EDC used  a 70mm Biogon lens....

Actually the lunar surface cameras had nonremovable 60 mm f/5.6 lenses carefully matched to their Reseau plates. The cameras for internal cabin use lacked Reseau plates so they could use removable lenses with a variety of focal lengths.

Yes of course! It always made me wonder why they called it a 70mm..... when it had a 60mm lens fitted, and of course the film is colour positive not negative(thank you for the correction alexsanchez). The high standards of this forum are hard to live up to for novice debunkers

p.s. I'm not a photographer, this is just from stuff I've read in the past.

[Zakalwe]

Do you have thrust vectoring on the LM?  I don't think RCS is ever used with the main engine.

Wouldn't it be better to do some research before you swagger into the forum, calling people morons, and mouthing off about subjects that you clearly have no idea about?

[Halcyon Dayz, FCD]

HOW DO YOU FAKE A ROCK?

Dontcha know that NASA can do anything it sets its mind to, except go to the Moon.

So they used the:

The New and Improved MagiTech™ MoonRock Oven®
Will fool every geologist in the world, even those you haven't bribed yet!*

(*Not available in this and the next 3 parallel Universes. Sales Taxes where applicable.)

Come to think of it, how many geologists live in million-dolar mansions and drive Maseratis?

Why so testy?  Sounds like someone who knows they're on thin ice.  I must be striking a nerve.  The truth does not suffer investigation.

So why don't you start investigating.

So far you have only mindlesly regurgitated nonsense fabricated by hoax promoters.
Why are you such a sheeple?